George Tenet lays it on the line.

[robeiae]

In Tenet's new book, that's about to be released, Tenet says that on the day after 9-11 (that would be September 12th, for those scoring at home), he met Richard Perle in the White House, while on the way to brief the President.

Tenet says that at that point in time, at that very moment, specifically the day after the terrorist attacks, Perle said to him:

"Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday. They bear responsibility."

Good stuff, right? It makes the admin stink to high heaven. There's only one problem...

All I wanna know, smart guy! All I wanna know is how these guys could be robbin' Tarzana City National on September 12 when they were in Fort f***in' Lauderdale September 12? Why don't you figure that out, huh?

Perle was in France (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/593daqmw.asp) on September 12th, unable to return to the U.S. until the 15th.

:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:

[Stew21]

i can't remember the last time I saw an effective use of a Point Break quote. Ok, because I never have seen one until now.

[robeiae]

It was a "slam dunk"...

:roll:

Sorry, but this whole thing is just too damn funny. Except it's not.

Thanks, Trish.

[Stew21]

Well played, and it is pretty freaking funny.
He was in France until the 15th...moron.

[billythrilly7th]

Well done on Point Break, Bob.

Moving on,,,,

I like this George Tenet. I'd never heard him speak before.

I saw the 60 minutes interview and this guy has some passion.

He's the patsy.

I don't think it was deserved. Most of it at least.

But, they've always said I'm a sucker for a good interview.

P.S. Rob, could you go get me two meatball sandwiches? Rob, get me two.

[tourdeforce]

Perhaps Richard Perle is a Cylon.

There are multiples of each model.

[blacbird]

I'm not much impressed with these Tenet revelations. The things he's bitching about were happening to and around him four-plus years ago. If he was so stinking upset about them, he had an ethical obligation to bring them to the fore then, to resign if necessary. Now, it's just adding a little detail to yesterday's known news.

caw

[robeiae]

How do fabrications add detail?

[tourdeforce]

Can someone post the actual passage from Tenet's book?

I would like to see what was acutally written.

Just from our own experiences here, it is obvious that people can come to false conclusions and fabricate arguments from things they read.

[blacbird]

How do fabrications add detail?

Well, let's just say I'm not entirely willing to view everything as a "fabrication" on the basis of one discrepancy. If we start doing that, gee, we're going to have a whole lot of trouble with a certain war we're engaged in, aren't we?

It's just that, from what I've heard so far (having not read the book, and not being inclined to do so), nothing seems really new or revelatory. Anybody who claims to be unaware of the major points Tenet seems to be making about the use of intel in the run-up to the war, especially by Cheney, has been living on another planet all this time.

caw

[Ol' Fashioned Girl]

He's sellin' a book.

[tourdeforce]

I bet this reads like-

"On my way into the White House on September 12th, I spoke with Richard Perle who said "Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday. They bear responsibility."

On a cell phone.

[blacbird]

Besides which, this Administration seems to have a lot of difficulty with high-level officers who just can't seem to remember things.

caw

[Joe270]

Tenet's spew won't earn a dime from me. His position of 'I was misuderstood' doesn't hold water. He was responsible, he should have clarified, not waited years then put it out for profit.

Ultimately, Bush is responsible because he hired a total incompetent for the position.

Never the less, it ticks me off when people in positions of responsibility whine and duck the blame. What a spineless prick.

[blacbird]

Joe is correct, except, in the interest of accuracy, I think he inherited Tenet from Clinton. Still, he had at the beginning of his Presidency every legitimate reason to let Tenet go, and appoint someone new, just as every President does with Cabinet officers. Why he kept him on is an unknown, and pretty odd, frankly, for this President.

caw

[Parkinsonsd]

WHoever was filling in for Rush today seemed more upset that Tenet "betrayed" the administration than by what he actually said.

The arguments went something along the line of "Sure Bush screwed up, but how dare Tenet say anything bad."

[blacbird]

No Administration in my lifetime has been more prone to "shoot the messenger" mentality. No surprise that the acolytes follow that lead.

caw

[Joe270]

Oops, I stand corrected. I'll take this opportunity to STFU now.

[SC Harrison]

Tenet's spew won't earn a dime from me. His position of 'I was misuderstood' doesn't hold water. He was responsible, he should have clarified, not waited years then put it out for profit.

Ultimately, Bush is responsible because he hired a total incompetent for the position.

Never the less, it ticks me off when people in positions of responsibility whine and duck the blame. What a spineless prick.

I'm sure Rob will grill me like a steak, but...first of all, Bush didn't hire Tenet or Richard Clarke, they were kept on staff from the Clinton administration. Second of all, both of them clarified their asses off, but Wolfowitz kept his myopic "Iraq is the real threat" song playing constantly, even in the face of numerous imminent Al Qaeda threat assessments.

The bottom line? Bin Laden was marginalized, because his threat wasn't easily dumped on Saddam's lap.

[dclary]

I guess my biggest concern with Tenet and his book is...

If you had to pick a bad-guy. If you had to point the finger at one guy and blame him for everything that's happened up to this point...

There's only one person at this point who's come out and said "I knew everything that was going on. I knew the lies. I knew the deception. I knew it was wrong. And yet, despite being in a position where I could make a national stink and possibly prevent the worst foreign policy disaster the US has ever made from occurring... I did nothing until I could stand to gain financially by spilling the beans in a book, long after I had given up any chance of having clout enough to make a difference."

And that one person is George Tenet.

[robeiae]

I'm sure Rob will grill me like a steak, but...first of all, Bush didn't hire Tenet or Richard Clarke, they were kept on staff from the Clinton administration.Grill? Nah. You just made the penultimate point, as far as I am concerned, for very specific and distinct reasons:

1) All intelligence failures that we now know characterized the CIA throughout the period preceding 9-11 and the period directly after it can be dropped in the lap of... (yes, Dave--you just said it)

But one has to wonder how the previous admin could possibly have been focused on OBL (as Clinton has now claimed) when they were privy to such useless intelligence. And for the record, I see no reason why they should have been, so I never held it against them. Still, the attempt to portray Clinton in a positive light in this regard is laughable. And of course, the Clinton admin is responsible for hiring Tenet. Clearly, in hindsight, a rather poor choice.

As to the "slam dunk," Tenet's attempt to re-frame that is equally laughable. The truth is clear--he didn't have a clue. Sad.

2) On September 12th, 2001, task numero uno (okay, maybe numero thirty-eight, or so) should have been the booting of Tenet, imho.

[robeiae]

I bet this reads like-

"On my way into the White House on September 12th, I spoke with Richard Perle who said "Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday. They bear responsibility."

On a cell phone.
Nah. You're wrong. Tenet is now claiming (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/30/perle-kristol-tenet/) he might have got the dates wrong, but the exchange took place in the manner he said it did. Not on a cell phone. Good fact-checking by the editors of his book, eh?

From the book:“He said to me, ‘Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday, they bear responsibility.’ It’s September the 12th. I’ve got the manifest with me that tell me al Qaeda did this. Nothing in my head that says there is any Iraqi involvement in this in any way shape or form and I remember thinking to myself, as I’m about to go brief the president, ‘What the hell is he talking about?’”Note the word "yesterday" in the story. Also, Tenet is clearly implying he was going to brief the President about 9-11 for the first time. Yet he now says he may have been off on the date...

[dclary]

Nah. You're wrong. Tenet is now claiming (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/30/perle-kristol-tenet/) he might have got the dates wrong, but the exchange took place in the manner he said it did. Not on a cell phone. Good fact-checking by the editors of his book, eh?

From the book:Note the word "yesterday" in the story. Also, Tenet is clearly implying he was going to brief the President about 9-11 for the first time. Yet he now says he may have been off on the date...

Maybe Iraq posted a mean blog entry on Al Jazeera on the 14th?

[TheGaffer]

I'm not much impressed with these Tenet revelations. The things he's bitching about were happening to and around him four-plus years ago. If he was so stinking upset about them, he had an ethical obligation to bring them to the fore then, to resign if necessary. Now, it's just adding a little detail to yesterday's known news.

caw

Exactly.

Him, Colin Powell, and all the other "truth-tellers" can shove it as far as I'm concerned. It's politically expedient now to be a tough guy when at the time, the man does his job, maybe this doesn't happen. Probably not, considering the Administration being hell-bent on invading, damn the torpedoes, but nice to let us all know this now, tough guy.

[robeiae]

Exactly.

Him, Colin Powell, and all the other "truth-tellers" can shove it as far as I'm concerned. It's politically expedient now to be a tough guy when at the time, the man does his job, maybe this doesn't happen. Probably not, considering the Administration being hell-bent on invading, damn the torpedoes, but nice to let us all know this now, tough guy.
I hear what you and blacbird are saying, but Tenet????

Come on, there's nothing to indicate he's a "truth-teller" in the least.

[TheGaffer]

I guess my biggest concern with Tenet and his book is...

If you had to pick a bad-guy. If you had to point the finger at one guy and blame him for everything that's happened up to this point...

There's only one person at this point who's come out and said "I knew everything that was going on. I knew the lies. I knew the deception. I knew it was wrong. And yet, despite being in a position where I could make a national stink and possibly prevent the worst foreign policy disaster the US has ever made from occurring... I did nothing until I could stand to gain financially by spilling the beans in a book, long after I had given up any chance of having clout enough to make a difference."

And that one person is George Tenet.

That's probably about right. You could put a number of people up there with that, too - clearly a vast number of people didn't have their eye on the ball.

As for Iraq, I have to put Powell on the line as just as much responsible. Tenet -- and the slam-dunk spin is indeed ludicrous -- is certainly up there, because of his signing off on the bullshit these guys spun in order to try to justify going into Iraq. But Powell lent his face to all of this.

[TheGaffer]

I hear what you and blacbird are saying, but Tenet????

Come on, there's nothing to indicate he's a "truth-teller" in the least.

You're quibbling. We're saying the same thing, here.

[Joe270]

It doesn't seem to me there is a disagreement here at all. dclary's first post nails it, if'n you're asking me. Everyone else essentially agrees, with subtle difference.

Bottom line: Tenet's a sniveling jerk trying to worm his way out of the history books. He should have stood up then, taken the heat, so now he'd look like a true statesman, not a worm.

[TheGaffer]

It is indeed annoying how all of these "revelations" are being treated now as gospel, now that the worm has turned and the winds have changed (cue the Scorpions), but when others warned of this stuff - regarding Iraq, I'm saying, less al-Qaeda - such as Scott Ritter, well, they were "Saddam lovers." It tells you what a miserable failure our press has been for many years.

[robeiae]

You're quibbling. We're saying the same thing, here.
I don't think so. I think you and blacbird are saying that Tenet is now tossing up all these "wrong things" that he knew were going on, but sat back and went with the flow at the time. I'm saying that Tenet is simply trying a carve a piece of the "we were misled" pie for himself, despite not really having any actual realities to back it up. HE. IS. LYING.

And yes, accepting that does your overall position no good, while it does serve to buttress mine, indirectly. But from what I have seen, that's the right way to characterize this.

[robeiae]

And Scott Ritter is a Saddam lover. :D

[TheGaffer]

I don't think so. I think you and blacbird are saying that Tenet is now tossing up all these "wrong things" that he knew were going on, but sat back and went with the flow at the time. I'm saying that Tenet is simply trying a carve a piece of the "we were misled" pie for himself, despite not really having any actual realities to back it up. HE. IS. LYING.

And yes, accepting that does your overall position no good, while it does serve to buttress mine, indirectly. But from what I have seen, that's the right way to characterize this.

I think it's somewhere in the middle. I think he's probably entitled to a bit of the "we were misled" thing, but if anyone was in the position to head that off, it was this guy, being that he was in charge of the CIA, even at risk of getting fired because he had been hired by Clinton. If we've learned anything in the last 6 years, being a Republican won't save your ass if you cross the Administration, so trying to be loyal back then didn't help him.

Either way...he still sucks.

[SC Harrison]

2) On September 12th, 2001, task numero uno (okay, maybe numero thirty-eight, or so) should have been the booting of Tenet, imho.

And why did they keep him on before and after 9/11?

Because accurate intelligence was neither needed nor wanted. Keep a hapless bureaucrat in charge of the CIA and you're less likely to be presented with information that would derail the master plan. They had to keep him around long enough to pull off the invasion of Iraq, and they did.

[robeiae]

And why did they keep him on before and after 9/11?

Because accurate intelligence was neither needed nor wanted. Keep a hapless bureaucrat in charge of the CIA and you're less likely to be presented with information that would derail the master plan. They had to keep him around long enough to pull off the invasion of Iraq, and they did.
Well, there was no standard at the time to make that assessment. Who knew the intelligence was inaccurate? Certainly not the previous denizens of the White House. Certainly not Congress.

Regardless, my perspective on this (the WMD thing) has always been--and I think Billy is on the same page, though he is free to correct me if I'm wrong--that Saddam was trying to maintain the appearance that he had/might have/was actively pursuing WMD's because he thought the threat of such gave him some measure of security. And he thought wrong.

[blacbird]

Well, there was no standard at the time to make that assessment. Who knew the intelligence was inaccurate?

Hans Blix evidently did.

caw

[blacbird]

I guess my biggest concern with Tenet and his book is...

If you had to pick a bad-guy. If you had to point the finger at one guy and blame him for everything that's happened up to this point...

There's only one person at this point who's come out and said "I knew everything that was going on. I knew the lies. I knew the deception. I knew it was wrong. And yet, despite being in a position where I could make a national stink and possibly prevent the worst foreign policy disaster the US has ever made from occurring... I did nothing until I could stand to gain financially by spilling the beans in a book, long after I had given up any chance of having clout enough to make a difference."

And that one person is George Tenet.

Yup. You and me disagree on a fair number of things, but this ain't one. Gaffer seems to get it, too. The guy's an unprincipled, unethical jerk.

caw

[SpookyWriter]

Yup. You and me disagree on a fair number of things, but this ain't one. Gaffer seems to get it, too. The guy's an unprincipled, unethical jerk.

cawWho Bush or Cheney?

[dclary]

Ha!

[robeiae]

Hans Blix evidently did.No, Hans Blix knew his teams had yet to find any WMD's. And still, Saddam twisted and pulled to create doubt. Again, it seems clear, right now, that he (Saddam) was banking on the mere possibility as some sort of deterrent. And again, he was dead wrong. You can still argue against the War, for continued inspections, for ignoring what Saddam was doing, whatever. And we can disagree on that. But I do not see how anyone cannot at least see Saddam's game for what it was. Nor do I see how anyone cannot, in hindsight, question every bit of intel we had at the time, regardless of the source, since it seems pretty clear now that no one really knew jack****, Blix and Ritter included. Sure, with all the conflicting reports, someone was bound to be right in some ways, at the very least. But how do you make that call then? Faith in the UN, because of it's great track record? Faith in the CIA because of their effectiveness in preventing 9-11?

And of course, from my own personal perspective, I don't give a rat's @ss about WMD's. But of course, that's just me. I'm mean. And I have poor dental hygiene.

[SpookyWriter]

And still, Saddam twisted and pulled to create doubt. Who, this guy? I see he was still pulling, twisting, and twitching right up to the end.

http://boles.com/called/06/saddam-dead.jpg

Good man. Stick to your convictions.

[Joe270]

Sometimes subterfuge works, sometimes you get Saddamed.

[SpookyWriter]

Sometimes subterfuge works, sometimes you get Saddamed.Sometimes subterfuge works, most times you get hung.

http://www.comandosupremo.com/musso4.jpg

[SC Harrison]

Well, there was no standard at the time to make that assessment. Who knew the intelligence was inaccurate? Certainly not the previous denizens of the White House. Certainly not Congress.

Regardless, my perspective on this (the WMD thing) has always been--and I think Billy is on the same page, though he is free to correct me if I'm wrong--that Saddam was trying to maintain the appearance that he had/might have/was actively pursuing WMD's because he thought the threat of such gave him some measure of security. And he thought wrong.

I agree about Saddam's stance, and I believe the Iranians are also trying to use the threat of nukes to gain x or y advantage. But you know what? Knocking the intelligence community for having bad intel on Iraq is (imo) crazy, because they were supposed to be focused on the War On Terror and not the War On Saddam.

I know there are nation-specific analysts and operatives, but from my understanding, they re-tasked a lot of people to sniff around for dirt on Saddam, while ignoring the guys who were Iraq specialists. Bad leadership, yes, and it goes all the way to the top. You want to blame Tenet? Fine. But you know who was poking him with a stick.

[robeiae]

But Steve, this was the same crowd tasked with monitoring Iraq after the first Gulf War, up until 9-11, not with terrorists. And throughout that period, they apparently believed Iraq had or was trying to get WMD's. At least that's what everyone in DC was saying in the late 90's, based on intel reports, I must surmise.

[SC Harrison]

But Steve, this was the same crowd tasked with monitoring Iraq after the first Gulf War, up until 9-11, not with terrorists. And throughout that period, they apparently believed Iraq had or was trying to get WMD's. At least that's what everyone in DC was saying in the late 90's, based on intel reports, I must surmise.

Right. He took his sweet time destroying the chemical agents he had, and there were definite attempts to obtain technology that might lead to the development of nuclear weapons.

But...the fact that these attempts were easily discovered led many to believe it was a political issue and not tactical, and the administration's lack of concern over other, more dangerous and likely nuclear proliferation threats should make it abundantly clear that WMDs were not the driving force behind the invasion of Iraq.

It was about 80% geopolitics, 10% "defense", and the remaining 10% was pure revenge.

And by the time it's over, it will (probably) be a trillion dollar adventure with questionable results.

We can't reshape the world, buddy. You know that as well as I.

[robeiae]

But...the fact that these attempts were easily discovered led many to believe it was a political issue and not tactical, and the administration's lack of concern over other, more dangerous and likely nuclear proliferation threats should make it abundantly clear that WMDs were not the driving force behind the invasion of Iraq.
Iraq rolled the dice, no?

My problem here is the willingness of nations to go along with this kind of charade. If you never are willing to treat things for what they really are, how do you ever expect to accomplish anything positive or productive? Hell, the UN's response to Saddam's game was the oil-for-food program. Brilliant. And all for the sake of what? World peace? And yet, was/is there world peace? Certainly not in Africa. Certainly not in the ME. Further, what of populations that suffer for generation after generation under the thumb of oppressive regimes? I know we can't solve all that ails the world, and oddly, most of those who think we can actually supported/support policies of appeasement, inanely believing that everything will work out in the end. As I've said before, such a perspective amounts to child-like philosophies of "if I can't see it, it's not happening" and "if I ignore it, maybe it will go away."

History. It's so passe.

[oswann]

Perle was in France (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/593daqmw.asp) on September 12th, unable to return to the U.S. until the 15th.

:ROFL: :ROFL: :ROFL:

Of every country on earth it had to be France.

Os.

[SC Harrison]

Iraq rolled the dice, no?



More than once. But that's not my point. In both the global war on terror, and the global proliferation of weapons and conflict, Iraq was at best a bit player. Even before the protracted insurgency, this invasion was a horrible waste of time and assets.

And don't get me started about who's to blame for human suffering in the world. Follow the trail of guns, buddy.

[TheGaffer]

But I do not see how anyone cannot at least see Saddam's game for what it was. Nor do I see how anyone cannot, in hindsight, question every bit of intel we had at the time, regardless of the source, since it seems pretty clear now that no one really knew jack****, Blix and Ritter included.

Yes, that was indeed Saddam's game. But it wasn't a game he was trying to play against us -- it was one he was trying to play against Iran. And of course for such a power-mad type, the illusion of his power is sometimes enough rather than having to display it and find that he doesn't have much (which is what happened).

But to me that still leaves us far from justification for the invasion, when keeping him in a box - which is what we were doing - was what was warranted. As for who knew what, the facts on the ground certainly didn't point in the direction of invasion, and what was known, as it turns out -- or what was disseminated -- was not true, and hyped, rather than carefully and methodically dissected.

You may reject the WMD rationale entirely in favor of just invading Saddam, period, but I didn't, and still don't, in terms of it being a good use of our own capital/assets. But put a seven-year-old in charge, and there we go.

[TheGaffer]

More on Jackoff Tenet:

While the swirl of publicity around his book has focused on his long debated role in allowing flawed intelligence to launch the war in Iraq, nobody is talking about his lucrative connection to that conflict ever since he resigned from the CIA in June 2004. In fact, Tenet has been earning substantial income by working for corporations that provide the U.S. government with technology, equipment and personnel used for the war in Iraq as well as the broader war on terror.

When Tenet hit the talk-show circuit last week to defend his stewardship of the CIA and his role in the run-up to the war, he did not mention that he is a director and advisor to four corporations that earn millions of dollars in revenue from contracts with U.S. intelligence agencies and the Department of Defense. Nor is it ever mentioned in his book. But according to public records, Tenet has received at least $2.3 million from those corporations in stock and other compensation. Meanwhile, one of the CIA's largest contractors gave Tenet access to a highly secured room where he could work on classified material for his book.


http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/05/07/tenet_money/

[tourdeforce]

Tenet, Rusmfeld, Rove, Wolfowitz, Rice, Bush... these are/were the people making life or death decisions on our behalf.

Scary.

[blacbird]

Tenet, Rusmfeld, Rove, Wolfowitz, Rice, Bush... these are/were the people making life or death decisions on our behalf.


According to Tenet, he didn't make decisions. I heard him interviewed in NPR last week, and it was truly pathetic. His view of his job, stated repeatedly in a variety of ways, was as a glorified messenger-boy, relaying intel to the Pres in a briefing every morning. He was a really really really busy guy, supervising thousands of employees, and didn't have the time to pay attention to matters outside his perceived sphere of influence. He didn't know this, that or the other regarding what Douglas Feith was doing in that separate and very private intelligence-vetting unit Rumsfeld set up, the one that evidently did push the Niger uranium purchase hoax forward, among other things. In short, Tenet comes across as the worst kind of responsibility-avoiding, credit-intercepting, indecisive bureaucrat.

Although I'll give him credit for one good line quoted from his book. I don't recall the exact phrasing, but it referred to Feith-based intelligence.

In short, George Tenet was a weak stick in a position where we definitely didn't need one of those.

caw